[#171800318] preValidate with acceptedClockSkewMs #29
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #29 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 66.08% 65.32% -0.76%
==========================================
Files 10 10
Lines 690 698 +8
Branches 104 103 -1
==========================================
Hits 456 456
- Misses 233 241 +8
Partials 1 1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
| @@ -554,7 +554,11 @@ const mainAttributeValidation = ( | |||
| .chain(IssueInstant => utcStringToDate(IssueInstant, "IssueInstant")) | |||
| .chain( | |||
| fromPredicate( | |||
| _ => !hasStrictValidation || _.getTime() < Date.now(), | |||
| _ => | |||
| _.getTime() < | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we move this computation at caller level (at the same level of hasStrictValidation) so we can reuse it seamlessy between inner methods ? ie.
const acceptedClockSkewMs = (samlConfig.acceptedClockSkewMs || 0) === -1
? Infinity
: Date.now() + samlConfig.acceptedClockSkewMs);
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In two cases the value is Infinity (NotBefore and IssueInstant) and on another case is -Infinity (NotOnOrAfter). How we can handle these scenarios?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sorry I didn't see this, it's ok as is then
Co-Authored-By: Danilo Spinelli <gunzip@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-Authored-By: Danilo Spinelli <gunzip@users.noreply.github.com>
No description provided.